Familypedia talk:Cemeteries
Looks pretty good, Zeph! Robin Patterson 13:20, 29 March 2007 (UTC) Levels of categories (First entry below was moved from the Template:category redirect talk page) This seems a bit of a mess. I was "fixing" Virginia so that it wouldn't show up as "Virginia, United States" in the "United States" category - that seemed redundant to me, and inconsistent with the other entries which I am rapidly adding to that category (Category:United States). Whilst fixing Virginia, I came across a page which directed me here. So, I stopped and left this comment. I'll take time to explain now that my flow is interrupted. I am putting two location categories for each cemetery, for example: West Church Cemetery, Tiny Township, Calhoun County, Michigan, USA would be listed under both: Category:Calhoun County, Michigan Category:Cemeteries in Michigan Rationale: There is more than one Tiny Township in the USA and possibly even more than one in Michigan itself; indeed, there is likely even more than one Calhoun County in different states in the USA. So a simple "Cemeteries in Calhoun County" could produce cemeteries in one or more different states which have no relation to each other at all. Again, Robin, it is unlikely (unless we have 1000 users of this Wikia) that Calhoun County, Michigan will ever need subject-matter specification (i.e. cemeteries in . . .); but if we do have that nice problem, we'll have the manpower to deal with it at that time. Until then "sufficient for the day is the evil thereof". On the other hand, we want people to be able to find cemeteries they are looking for even if they don't know what township or county a particular cemetery is in (which is how individual cemeteries are now filed). An entire country listing would be impossibly unreadable and unmanageable. The next step down is the state-level which also might be unreadable, but it's the best we can provide such an uninformed cemetery seeker - we can only wish them good luck in their search. Comments? Thanks. Respectfully, Zephyrinus 00:33, 30 March 2007 (UTC) :I agree almost entirely. That's a good structure for the foreseeable future. Last paragraph, though - if they know the cemetery name but not the county (maybe not even the state!), or know it was in Tiny Town but not its name, we should encourage them to type what they know in the search box. Robin Patterson 12:24, 30 March 2007 (UTC) :The search boxes have miraculously appeared and look good. I've standardised a bit and created a model as a subpage of this. Someone has created a few "Category:Cemeteries in County, State": not surprising with populous counties, and not a problem: that "model" page has on its talk page a two-line model for them so that they get both of the necessary categories (as above). Robin Patterson 13:48, 13 June 2007 (UTC) Progress in 16 months We now actively encourage categories such as "Category:Cemeteries in County, State". It is one of the cells in the standard county navigation box, and its "main article" could well have the same page name instead of being a subpage of the county page. The category goes into "Category:County, State" and "Category:Cemeteries in State|''County''". Robin Patterson 09:10, 22 October 2008 (UTC) Large cemeteries We already have some huge cemetery pages. One I struggled with was over 190 kB: Oak Grove Cemetery, Comstock Township, Kalamazoo County, Michigan, USA ‎bytes. Not easy to edit or to find things in. I think such whoppers should be broken into blocks or some meaningful divisions using subpages. That one has eight sections (A-H), which suggests an obvious break-up method. I've drafted some links there. The only obvious disadvantage of such a break-up is searching a page using the Edit menu ("Find in This Page"). You may need to do that eight times if you know the person's name but not the section. If our search box is working, that's not necessary: put the person's name and cemetery name in the search box and you should go straight to the right subpage and see the context. But that leads me to consider categories for individual cemeteries, in the next section. Robin Patterson 09:10, 22 October 2008 (UTC) Categories for individual cemeteries I see no problem with having a category for an individual cemetery, holding the pages for individuals whose remains were buried or scattered there or even just commemorated by a plaque there. No great need to particularise by "Buried in" or "Cremated at" or any such (yet). See Category:Broken Hill Cemetery, New South Wales. That category can go into the category for the locality and the category for cemeteries in the county/borough/parish/region. Where the cemetery is broken into subpages as suggested above, they should appear near the start of the listing (by means of piped links). Robin Patterson 09:10, 22 October 2008 (UTC)